Far from being just some old political cartoon, the incident in question was real and took place in the well of the United States Senate. The cowardly attack was premeditated and grossly unfair, as the victim Sen. Charles Sumner, was both unarmed and seated when accosted. All because of some perceived slight the aggressor felt as a result of Sen. Sumner exercising his first amendment rights in the execution of his duties as the representative of the State of Massachusetts.
Our notions of Southern Chivalry are exploded when faced with the reality that Preston Brooks was celebrated all over the South for nearly beating a US Senator from another state to death. That event and its aftermath provide a clear window into the true nature of the Southern psyche of that time, especially in the cradle of secession.
As far as I'm concerned it would have been much better for this country if, when South Carolina declared Secession, the President of the United States immediately sent a Naval armada to Charleston, reduced that traitor filled city to rubble, then hung every remaining Confederate from the nearest tree.
Maybe once that cup of blood had been spilled and the South had it's nose busted right good it would have come to it's senses..just like you did.
I know it happened. What I don't understand is why you care so particularly, was he kin or something? Even republican presidential candidate Stephan Douglas (who was not immune to Sumner's personal attacks), said Sen. Sumner would probably get shot for what he had said about Sen. Brooks, and his uncle, who he accused of taking a mistress and who he ridiculed for a speech impediment while the latter was not even present to defend himself. Things like this got people killed in those days you know. It would have been better if Brooks HAD simply challenged Sumner to a dual, though I rather think if he had shot Sumner, you would still call it dishonorable. Hell, I probably would have beat the tar out of him too if he said stuff like that about me and my family. Course, I'd probably just go at him with my fists and forget the rod, or the pistol.
That event and its aftermath provide a clear window into the true nature of the Southern psyche of that time, especially in the cradle of secession.
I rather think it, like the violence committed by “Old Osawatomie Brown” a few days latter when he hacked up five bound men with a sword, provide a window into the true nature of the Human psyche. But you know, everyone has to dehumanize those they disagree with; either that or themselves. If you feel the need to dehumanize a whole culture, well... you are in ironic company let me tell ya.
As far as I'm concerned it would have been much better for this country if, when South Carolina declared Secession, the President of the United States immediately sent a Naval armada to Charleston, reduced that traitor filled city to rubble, then hung every remaining Confederate from the nearest tree.
A lot of Yankees felt like that, some of em before SC seceded. I assume, however, that you aren't including women and children in such an application of “justice,” though if you don't mind me being just a little condescending, that might be ascribing to much humanity to someone who clearly is gonna disagree with me.
However, if Lincoln had done what you think “would have been much better for this country,” Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, and Delaware absolutely all would have gone out before the dust cleared. And Washington would have been occupied before Lincoln could have even made the call for an army of 75,000 troops to invade the South; let alone protect Washington. Are you sure that would have been the best thing for this Country?